Probably we will never know the real motive, but what he
said and stood for must have upset someone.

Restrictions on freedom of speech and paranoiac reactions to criticism
were certainly not invented in Cambodia, as the posters and their stories
illustrate, but they do have one more important twist.

An Op Ed I drafted has not so far been taken up for
publication, so I offer this blog instead as my tribute to Kem Ley.The Op Ed began with a story:

“Where did you get that idea from?” asked
disapprovingly the senior official.The
members of his entourage dutifully nodded approvingly of the question, but not
one spoke.They all stared back at me in
silence.So I answered “Well, Your
Excellency, it is in your ministry’s strategic plan!”Before I had the chance to show the
“offending” pages, he got up and left without a word.He had lost face.

In essence “losing face” is what led to Dr Kem Ley’s
slaying. He had a knack of telling telling stories (like this one just before he died.)

The arbitrary killing shares the same perverse atrocious logic as the "honour killing" of Qandeel Baloch in Pakistan.

At the heart of the dilemma is what kind of a country
Cambodia is and should be?It has never
known anything but authoritarian rule.It has only had fleeting experiences of the kind of democracy and free
speech envisaged by most of the countries that signed the Paris Peace Accords in 1991.

For the entire period since those accords, parallel
divergent paths have existedOn the one hand,
there is the firm “we know best” leadership.On the other are all the initiatives put forward and supported by the
international community, the choice of a majority citizens as expressed consistently in
elections, for more inclusive governance.

The preaching differs from the practice.Social welfare, or social work, is relegated
to social order, as in "Law and Order".

No doubt part of the problem rests in the lack of real
communication – with far too much jargon and highly academic English in
original policy documents that is then supposed to be translated in to Khmer
and other languages, to be understood and acted upon by all concerned.(Subject of course to if there is the real
will to do so.Often that is missing.)

The saddest fact about the loss of Kem Ley is that he was
one of the very few commentators and communicators who could shed light on
complex issues, to make them understandable by Cambodians at all levels.

Like Kem Ley of late, was I correct, or to blame, for causing a senior official to
lose face?His entourage told me
afterwards that I should have kept quiet, to spare him embarrassment, and to keep him blissfully
in the dark.They have never forgiven
me. Would they have put him wise otherwise? I doubt it, just as others won't risk doing so today with their superiors. But then who curses the darkness most? Kem Ley and his illuminating words were snuffed out all too soon!

Well Phnom Penh certainly turned out in style to give Kem Ley a great send-off, as this Article and picture denotes.

This is the largest public rebuke of the Cambodian Government and its crackdown on all forms of opposition, including independent civil society advocates like Kem Ley. Will the reaction be contrition, like the short-lived acknowledgement of being out-of-touch soon after the 2013 election? Or will it be even more restrictions on freedoms?

Update March 2017
A very sad "conclusion" to the judicial processes - please see statement.

Yes, and it is greatly encouraging as a testimony to Kem Ley that people will try to keep his life's work going. Unfortunately it is still a dangerous path. More blood will be spilled, more tears shed, before Cambodia's long history of political violence ends. Let's hope that all of these sacrifices are not in vain.